HomeMy WebLinkAbout20091633.tiffBEFORE THE WELD COUNTY, COLORADO, PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION OF RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Moved by Robert Grand, that the following resolution be introduced for passage by the Weld County Planning
Commission. Be it resolved by the Weld County Planning Commission that the application for:
CASE NUMBER:
APPLICANT:
PLANNER:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
REQUEST:
LOCATION:
USR-1651
Jay & Sherrie Woods
Chris Gathman
Part of the SW4SE4 of Section 36, T6N, R66W of the 6th P.M., Weld County,
Colorado.
A Site Specific Development Plan and Special Use Permit for any use permitted as
a Use by Right, an ACCESSORY USE, or a Use by Special Review in the
COMMERCIAL or Industrial Zone Districts, (Lawn Tree and Care Business)
provided that the property is not a Lot in an approved or recorded subdivision plat or
lots parts of a map or plan filed prior to adoption of any regulations controlling
subdivision in the A (Agricultural) Zone District.
South of and adjacent to "F" Street and 1/8 mile west of "C" Street.
be recommended favorably to the Board of County Commissioners for the following reasons:
The submitted materials are in compliance with the application requirements of Section 23-2-260
of the Weld County Code.
2. It is the opinion of the Planning Commission that the applicant has shown compliance with Section
23-2-220 of the Weld County Code as follows:
A. Section 23-2-220.A.1 -- The proposed use is consistent with Chapter 22 and any other
applicable code provisions or ordinance in effect. Section 22-2-60.D A.Goal.4 states
"Conversion of agricultural land to nonurban residential, commercial and industrial uses
will be accommodated when the subject site is in an area that can support such
development. Such development shall attempt to be compatible with the region." The
parcel is only 2.5 acres in size and is located within the 100 -year floodplain which makes
it impractical for farming. Though there is an existing City of Greeley sewer line located
within 400 -feet of the south property line, the existing business office and facilities are
located approximately 600 -feet from the sewer line. The attached development standards
and conditions of approval ensure that this development will be compatible with the
surrounding area.
B. Section 23-2-220.A.2 -- The proposed use is consistent with the intent of the A
(Agricultural) Zone District. Section 23-2-20.R of the Weld County Code provides for any
use permitted as a Use by Right, an Accessory Use, or a Use by Special Review in the
Commercial or Industrial zone districts, provided that the property is not a Lot in an
approved or recorded subdivision plat or lots parts of a map or plan filed prior to adoption
of any regulations controlling subdivisions in the A (Agricultural) Zone District.
C. Section 23-2-220.A.3 -- The uses which will be permitted will be compatible with the
existing surrounding land uses. The site is adjacent to the City of Greeley municipal
boundaries (vacant land) to the west, a single-family residence to the west (zoned R-1
residential), two single-family residences to the north and west (zoned R-1 residential),
and an industrial operation (zoned 1-3 Industrial) to the northeast. Railroad tracks and
single-family residences located within the City of Greeley are located to the south. The
attached development standards and conditions of approval will ensure that the use is
compatible with the existing surrounding land uses. The Department of Planning Services
is requiring a screening plan be submitted as a condition of approval.
D. Section 23-2-220.A.4 -- The uses which will be permitted will be compatible with future
development of the surrounding area as permitted by the existing zoning and with the
future development as projected by Chapter 22 of the Weld County Code and any other
applicable code provisions or ordinances in effect, or the adopted Master Plans of
affected municipalities.
i
2009-1633
Resolution USR-1651
Jay & Sherrie Woods
Page 2
•
•
•
The property is located within the urban growth boundary of the City of Greeley. Section
22-2-110.C of the Weld County Code states the following criteria shall be considered
when considering an application in an urban growth boundary area:
UGB.Policy 3.1. The County may consider approving a land use development within an urban
growth boundary area if all of the following criteria are met:
a. UGB.Policy 3.1.1. The adjacent municipality does not consent to annex the land or
property in a timely manner or annexation is not legally possible.
b. UGB.Policy 3.1.2. The proposed use, including public facility and service impacts, is
compatible with this Chapter and with other urban type uses.
c. UGB.Policy 3.1.3. The proposed use attempts to be compatible with the adjacent
municipality's comprehensive plan.
The City of Greeley, in their referral dated February 29, 2008 and letter dated March 20,
2008, states that it would be more appropriate for the applicant to annex and develop
within the City of Greeley. However, in its current state, any annexation would have to be
petitioned by the property owner. The City of Greeley also indicated that the proposed use
would be required to locate in the Commercial High Intensity (C -H), Industrial Low
Intensity (I -L), or Industrial Medium Intensity (I -M) zone. The adjacent property to the
west was recently annexed into Greeley and zoned Industrial Medium Intensity (I -M).
E. Section 23-2-220.A.5 -- The application complies with Section 23-5 of the Weld County
Code.
The USR area is in a Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA) as determined by a study from
the US Army Corp of Engineers/City of Greeley study. Per Code of Federal Regulation
Title 44, Section 59.1 development is defined as "any man-made change to improved or
unimproved real estate, including but not limited to buildings or other structures, mining,
dredging, filling, grading, paving, excavation or drilling operations or storage of equipment
or materials."
A flood hazard development permit will be required to be submitted and approved for any
development in the Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA).
Effective January 1, 2003, Building Permits issued on the proposed lots will be required to
adhere to the fee structure of the County Road Impact Program. (Ordinance 2002-11)
Effective August 1, 2005, Building permits issued on the subject site will be required to
adhere to the fee structure of the Capital Expansion Impact Fee and the
Stormwater/Drainage Impact Fee. (Ordinance 2005-8 Section 5-8-40)
F. Section 23-2-220.A.6 -- The applicant has demonstrated a diligent effort to conserve
prime agricultural land in the locational decision for the proposed use. The property is
only 2.5 acres in size and has an existing residence/office and shop buildings. The
property is too small to be considered viable for farming.
G. Section 23-2-220.A.7 -- The Design Standards (Section 23-2-240, Weld County Code),
Operation Standards (Section 23-2-250, Weld County Code), Conditions of Approval and
Development Standards ensure that there are adequate provisions for the protection of
health, safety, and welfare of the inhabitants of the neighborhood and County.
This recommendation is based, in part, upon a review of the application materials submitted by the
applicant, other relevant information regarding the request, and responses from referral entities.
Resolution USR-1651
Jay & Sherrie Woods
Page 3
The Planning Commission recommendation for approval is conditional upon the following:
1. Prior to recording the plat:
A. All sheets of the plat shall be labeled USR-1651. (Department of Planning Services)
B. The plat shall be amended to delineate the following:
1. All sheets of the plat shall be labeled USR-1651. (Department of Planning
Services)
2. The attached Development Standards. (Department of Planning Services)
3. The approved screening plan. (Department of Planning Services)
4. C and F Streets are arterial roads and require a 140 -foot right-of-way at full build
out. There is presently a 60 -foot right-of-way. 70 -feet from the centerlines of C
and F streets shall be indicated as edge of future right-of-way. These roads are
maintained by Weld County. Pursuant to the definition of SETBACK in the Weld
County Zoning (23-1-90), the required setback is measured from the future right-
of-way line. (Department of Public Works)
C. The applicant shall submit a dust abatement plan, to address parking area and dust pile
concerns, for review and approval, to the Environmental Health Services, Weld County
Department of Public Health & Environment. Written evidence of Department of Public
Health and Environment approval shall be provided to the Department of Planning
Services. (Department of Public Health & Environment)
As the applicant intends to utilize the existing septic system at the home, for employee
use, the septic system shall be reviewed by a Colorado Registered Professional Engineer.
The review shall consist of observation of the system and a technical review describing
the systems ability to handle the proposed hydraulic load. The review shall be submitted
to the Environmental Health Services Division of the Weld County Department of Public
Health and Environment. In the event the system is found to be inadequately sized or
constructed the system shall be brought into compliance with current Regulations. Written
evidence of Department of Public Health and Environment approval shall be provided to
the Department of Planning Services. (Department of Public Health & Environment)
A copy of the Commercial Applicators license, from the Colorado Department of
Agriculture, shall be provided to Environmental Health Services, Weld County Department
of Public Health & Environment. Written evidence of such shall be provided to the
Department of Planning Services. (Department of Public Health & Environment)
F. The applicant shall submit a waste handling plan, for approval, to the Environmental
Health Services Division of the Weld County Department of Public Health & Environment.
The plan shall include at a minimum, the following:
1) A list of wastes which are expected to be generated on site (this should include
expected volumes and types of waste generated).
2) A list of the type and volume of chemicals to be stored on site.
3) The waste handler and facility where the waste will be disposed (including the
facility name, address, and phone number)
Evidence of Department of Public Health and Environment approval shall be submitted
to the Department of Planning Services. (Department of Public Health & Environment)
Resolution USR-1651
Jay & Sherrie Woods
Page 4
•
•
•
G. The applicant shall address the requirements of the Department of Planning Services as
stated in the landscape referral dated February 1, 2008. Written evidence of such shall
be provided to the Department of Planning Services. (Department of Planning Services)
H. The applicant shall address the recommendations of the Weld County Sheriff's Office as
stated in their referral dated February 22, 2008. Written evidence of such shall be
provided to the Department of Planning Services. (Weld County Sheriff's)
The applicant shall attempt to address the recommendations/requirements of the City of
Greeley as stated in the referral dated February 29, 2008 and letter dated March 20,
2008. Written evidence of such shall be provided to the Department of Planning Services.
(City of Greeley)
J. The applicant shall address the requirements of the Department of Public Works as
stated in their referral dated February 28, 2008. Written evidence of such shall be
provided to the Department of Planning Services. (Department of Public Works)
K. The 2 existing pole frame buildings are currently permitted as private storage buildings
and will require a change of use permit for the new use. The office area in the existing
residence will require a building permit and will need to comply with chapter 34 of the
International Building Code as well as have an accessible entrance. The applicant shall
provide a letter of approval from the Union Colony Fire Protection District prior to applying
for building permits. Evidence that these building permits have been applied for shall be
provided to the Department of Planning Services. (Department of Building Inspection)
L. The applicant shall submit a Screening Plan for review and approval by the Department of
Planning Services. (Department of Planning Services)
M. The applicant shall enter into an Improvements Agreement according to policy regarding
collateral for improvements and post adequate collateral for all required improvements.
The improvements agreement will not be needed if the necessary improvements are done
to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works and the Department of Planning
Services. (Department of Planning Services)
N. The applicant shall submit two (2) paper copies of the plat for preliminary approval to the
Weld County Department of Planning Services. (Department of Planning Services)
2. One month Prior to Construction Activities:
A. The applicant shall submit evidence of a Colorado Discharge Permit System or CDPS
permit from the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPH&E),
Water Quality Control Division, to cover stormwater discharges from construction sites (5
CCR-1002-61) Alternately, the applicant can provide evidence from CDPH&E that they
are not subject to the CDPS requirements. (Department of Public Health & Environment)
3. Prior to Certificate of Occupancy:
A. If an individual sewage disposal system is installed for the proposed shop and/or
proposed house it shall be installed according to the Weld County Individual Sewage
Disposal Regulations. (Department of Public Health & Environment)
The septic system for the proposed shop, if the shop is utilized as part of the business,
3is required to be designed by a Colorado Registered Professional Engineer according to
the Weld County Individual Sewage Disposal Regulations. (Department of Public Health &
Environment)
Resolution USR-1651
Jay & Sherrie Woods
Page 5
•
•
•
C. There shall be no washing of vehicles on the site unless a facility is constructed to capture
all effluent and prevent discharges in accordance with the Rules and Regulations of the
Water Quality Control Commission, and the Environmental Protection Agency.
(Department of Public Health & Environment)
4. Upon completion of 1. above the applicant shall submit a Mylar plat along with all other
documentation required as Conditions of Approval. The Mylar plat shall be recorded in the office
of the Weld County Clerk and Recorder by Department of Planning Services' Staff. The plat shall
be prepared in accordance with the requirements of Section 23-2-260.D of the Weld County
Code. The Mylar plat and additional requirements shall be submitted within thirty (30) days from
the date of the Board of County Commissioners resolution. The applicant shall be responsible for
paying the recording fee. (Department of Planning Services)
5. The Department of Planning Services respectively requests the surveyor provide a digital copy of
this Use by Special Review. Acceptable CAD formats are .dwg, .dxf, and .dgn (Microstation);
acceptable GIS formats are ArcView shapefiles, Arclnfo Coverages and Arclnfo Export files
format type is .e00. The preferred format for Images is .tif (Group 4). (Group 6 is not acceptable).
This digital file may be sent to maps{cTco.weld.co.us. (Department of Planning Services)
6. The Special Review activity shall not occur nor shall any building or electrical permits be issued on
the property until the Special Review plat is ready to be recorded in the office of the Weld County
Clerk and Recorder. (Department of Planning Services)
Motion seconded by
VOTE:
For Passage
Robert Grand
Bill Hall
Tom Holton
Doug Ochsner
Erich Ehrlich
Nick Berryman
Against Passage Absent
Roy Spitzer
Mark Lawley
The Chair declared the resolution passed and ordered that a certified copy be forwarded with the file of this
case to the Board of County Commissioner's for further proceedings.
CERTIFICATION OF COPY
I, Kristine Ranslem, Recording Secretary for the Weld County Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the
above and foregoing resolution is a true copy of the resolution of the Planning Commission of Weld County,
Colorado, adopted on July 7, 2008.
Dated the 7th of July, 2008.
Kristine Ranslem
Secretary
•
SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Jay & Sherrie Woods
USR-1651
1. The Site Specific Development Plan and Special Use Permit is for a use permitted as a Use by Right,
an Accessory Use, or a Use by Special Review in the Commercial or industrial zone districts, (Lawn
Tree and Care business) provided that the property is not a Lot in an approved or recorded
subdivision plat or lots parts of a map or plan filed prior to adoption of any regulations controlling
subdivisions in the A (Agricultural) Zone District and subject to the Development Standards stated
hereon. (Department of Planning Services)
2. Approval of this plan may create a vested property right pursuant to Section 23-8-10 of the Weld
County Code. (Department of Planning Services)
3. The operation shall be limited to ten (10) vehicles and a twenty -foot (20) foot trailer (2 ranger pickups
and eight (8) one ton trucks). (Department of Planning Services)
4. Hours of operation shall be from 7:00 AM to 6:00 PM Monday through Friday during the months of
July through March and 7:00 AM to 6:00 PM Monday through Saturday. (Department of Planning
Services)
5. All outdoor storage and vehicle parking shall be screened from adjacent properties by an opaque
privacy fence. Outdoor storage shall not extend above the top of the privacy fence. (Department of
Planning Services)
Employees shall be limited to a total of fifteen (15). (Department of Planning Services)
7. All liquid and solid wastes (as defined in the Solid Wastes Disposal Sites and Facilities Act, 30-20-
100.5, C.R.S.) shall be stored and removed for final disposal in a manner that protects against
surface and groundwater contamination. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
8. No permanent disposal of wastes shall be permitted at this site. This is not meant to include those
wastes specifically excluded from the definition of a solid waste in the Solid Wastes Disposal Sites
and Facilities Act, 30-20-100.5, C.R.S. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
9. Waste materials shall be handled, stored, and disposed in a manner that controls fugitive dust,
blowing debris, and other potential nuisance conditions. (Department of Public Health and
Environment)
10. The facility shall operate in accordance with the approved "waste handling plan". (Department of
Public Health and Environment)
11. Fugitive dust and fugitive particulate emissions shall be controlled on this site. The facility shall be
operated in accordance with the approved dust abatement plan at all times. (Department of Public
Health and Environment)
12. The facility shall have sufficient equipment available to implement dust control as required by the
Weld County Department of Public Health and Environment. (Department of Public Health and
Environment)
13. The facility shall adhere to the maximum permissible noise levels allowed in the Residential Zone as
delineated in 25-12-103, C.R.S. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
• 14.
Adequate handwashing & toilet facilities shall be provided for the employees and patrons of the
facility, at all times. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
Resolution USR-1651
Jay & Sherrie Woods
Page 7
15. Sewage disposal for the facility shall be by septic system. Any septic system located on the property
must comply with all provisions of the Weld County Code, pertaining to Individual Sewage Disposal
Systems. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
16. The facility shall utilize the existing public water supply (City of Greeley). (Department of Public Health
and Environment)
17. All pesticides, fertilizer, and other potentially hazardous chemicals must be stored and handled in a
safe manner in accordance with product labeling and in a manner that minimizes the release of
hazardous air pollutants (HAP's) and volatile organic compounds (VOC's). (Department of Public
Health and Environment)
18. Any vehicle washing area(s) shall capture all effluent and prevent discharges in accordance with the
Rules and Regulations of the Water Quality Control Commission, and the Environmental Protection
Agency. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
19. Building permits shall be obtained prior to the construction of any new building. Buildings may
require an engineered foundation based on a site -specific geotechnical report or an open hole
inspection performed by a Colorado registered engineer. Engineered foundations shall be
designed by a Colorado registered engineer. (Department of Building Inspection)
20. Buildings shall conform to the requirements of the codes adopted by Weld County at the time of
permit application. (Department of Building Inspection)
21. Fire resistance of walls and openings, construction requirements, maximum building height and
allowable areas will be reviewed at the plan review. Setback and offset distances shall be
determined by the Zoning Ordinance. (Department of Building Inspection)
• 22. A letter of approval from Union Colony Protection District shall be provided to the Department of
Building Inspection prior to applying for any building permits. (Department of Building Inspection)
23. Effective January 1, 2003, Building Permits issued on the proposed lots will be required to adhere to
the fee structure of the Weld County Road Impact Program. (Ordinance 2002-11) (Department of
Planning Services)
24. Effective August 1, 2005, Building permits issued on the subject site will be required to adhere to the
fee structure of the Capital Expansion Impact Fee and the Stormwater/Drainage Impact Fee.
(Ordinance 2005-8 Section 5-8-40) (Department of Planning Services)
25. The applicant must take into consideration storm water quantity capture and provide accordingly for
best management practices. (Department of Public Works)
26. Direct access from a public road will be limited to one (1) per legal parcel, except as further limited or
restricted by zoning or subdivision regulations. Additional accesses may be approved by the
Department of Public Works or the Board of County Commissioners. This policy shall apply to all new
and existing accesses within the unincorporated areas of the County. Properties within municipalities
or other counties which access County roads are subject to this policy. (Department of Public Works)
27. A Flood Hazard Development Permit will be required for any development on the site. Per Code of
Federal Regulation Title 44, Section 59.1 development is defined as "any man-made change to
improved or unimproved real estate, including but not limited to buildings or other structures, mining,
dredging, filling, grading, paving, excavation or drilling operations or storage of equipment or
materials." (Department of Planning Services)
•
28. The screening on site shall be maintained in accordance with the approved Screening Plan.
(Department of Planning Services)
Resolution USR-1651
Jay & Sherrie Woods
Page 8
29. The property owner or operator shall be responsible for complying with the Design Standards of
Section 23-2-240, Weld County Code.
30. The property owner or operator shall be responsible for complying with the Operation Standards of
Section 23-2-250, Weld County Code.
31. Personnel from the Weld County Government shall be granted access onto the property at any
reasonable time in order to ensure the activities carried out on the property comply with the
Development Standards stated herein and all applicable Weld County regulations.
32. The operation shall comply with all applicable rules and regulations of the State and Federal agencies
and the Weld County Code. (Department of Public Health & Environment)
33. The Special Review area shall be limited to the plans shown hereon and governed by the foregoing
standards and all applicable Weld County regulations. Substantial changes from the plans or
Development Standards as shown or stated shall require the approval of an amendment of the Permit
by the Weld County Board of County Commissioners before such changes from the plans or
Development Standards are permitted. Any other changes shall be filed in the office of the
Department of Planning Services.
34. The property owner or operator shall be responsible for complying with all of the foregoing
Development Standards. Noncompliance with any of the foregoing Development Standards may be
reason for revocation of the Permit by the Board of County Commissioners.
I
•
7-7-
•
•
PLANNER:
REQUEST:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
LOCATION:
Jacqueline Hatch
A Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit for a
kennel (15 dogs and grooming) and one single family dwelling unit per lot
(second home on the property) in the A (Agricultural) Zone District.
Lot B of RE -1568 being part of SE4 of Section 32, T5N, R64W of the 6th P.M.,
Weld County, Colorado.
Approximately 1/4 mile North of CR 50 and approximately 1/4 mile west of CR
53.
Jacqueline Hatch, Planning Services, commented that staff is in support of this application remaining on the
consent agenda. She added that staff is asking for a minor change to the staff comments. She
recommended that Item 1.E in regard to the Improvements Agreement be removed from the Conditions of
Approval. Ms. Hatch added that the applicant is aware of this change.
Tom Holton moved to remove Condition of Approval Prior to Recording the Plat Item 1.E, seconded by Nick
Berryman. Motion carried.
The Chair asked the applicant if they wish to keep this item on the consent agenda and if they are in
agreement with the amended conditions of approval. The applicant indicated yes.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. No
one wished to speak.
Tom Holton moved that the Consent Agenda including Cases USR-1696 and USR-1701 be forwarded to the
Board of County Commissioners along with the amended Conditions of Approval and Development Standards
with the Planning Commission's recommendation of approval, seconded by Robert Grand. Motion carried
unanimously.
The Chair read the first hearing case into record.
CASE NUMBER:
APPLICANT:
PLANNER:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
REQUEST:
LOCATION:
USR-1651
Jay & Sherrie Woods
Chris Gathman
Part of the SW4SE4 of Section 36, T6N, R66W of the 6th P.M., Weld County,
Colorado.
A Site Specific Development Plan and Special Use Permit for any use permitted
as a Use by Right, an ACCESSORY USE, or a Use by Special Review in the
COMMERCIAL or Industrial Zone Districts, (Lawn Tree and Care Business)
provided that the property is not a Lot in an approved or recorded subdivision
plat or lots parts of a map or plan filed prior to adoption of any regulations
controlling subdivision and One (1) SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNIT per LOT
other than those permitted under Section 23-3-20.A (addition of future single-
family home) in the A (Agricultural) Zone District.
South of and adjacent to "F" Street and 1/8 mile west of "C" Street.
Chris Gathman, Planning Services, wished to make a clarification to this application. In the original
application the applicant had requested one additional single family residence; however after some
conversations with the applicant that has now been removed from this application. Therefore the request
addresses only the lawn and tree care business.
The site is located south of and adjacent to "F" Street and 1/8 mile west of "C" Street.
Thirteen referral agencies reviewed this case and eleven referral agencies responded. Referral agency
recommendations and requirements have been addressed through development standards and conditions
of approval.
The site is adjacent to the City of Greeley municipal boundaries to the west, a single-family residence to
the west (zoned R-1 residential), two single-family residences to the north and west (zoned R-1
residential), and an industrial operation (zoned 1-3 Industrial) to the northeast. Railroad tracks
family residences located within the City of Greeley are located to the south.
d single
i
I
EXHIBIT
L&SR. - IL0 5i
i
•
•
This case began as a zoning violation (violation # VI -0400132) for operating a lawn and tree care business
in the R-1 (Low Density Residential) zone district. The violation case was originally brought before the
Board of County Commissioners on August 9, 2005. The applicants were directed to apply for a change of
zone application to Agriculture to address correcting the violation because commercial businesses are not
allowed as a use by right or as a special use permit in the R-1 Zone District. CZ -1104 was approved by
the Board of County Commissioners on February 15, 2006. The applicants are now applying to correct the
violation through a Use by Special Review Permit to allow a commercial business to operate in the
Agricultural Zone District.
The site has an existing City of Greeley Water Tap and is on an existing septic system.
During the review of this application, the City of Greeley determined that the Woods property was located
within 400 -feet of an existing sewer -line. It is a requirement of the ISDS Regulations that any development
requiring a permit for a new or expanded septic system within 400 -feet of sewer is required to abandon
the septic system. They don't have to abandon the system if no changes are needed. If they need a
permit they have to connect to sewer unless it has been determined by the municipality that sewer service
is not feasible. The City of Greeley has determined that it is feasible to provide sewer service to the
Woods property. The City of Greeley requires annexation or at a minimum an annexation agreement as a
condition of providing city sewer service.
This case has been continued several times to allow the applicant to discuss annexation and/or an
annexation agreement with the City of Greeley and also to allow the applicant time to deal with personal
health issues. No progress has been made toward annexation or an annexation agreement between the
City of Greeley and the applicant since preliminary meetings were held between the two parties in the
spring of 2008.
Unless the applicant can demonstrate that the existing septic system on the property is adequate to serve
the proposed landscaping business as outlined in condition 1.D — it is staffs position that the applicant will
need to connect to City of Greeley sewer. Mr. Gathman clarified that on the original application the
request was for up to 24 employees associated with the business; however Mr. Woods sent an email
yesterday indicating that he would like to reduce the number to 15 employees.
The site is located within the Urban Growth Boundary Area for the City of Greeley.
Section 22-2-40.C UD.Goal 3. states: "Until Intergovernmental Agreements are in place with
a particular municipality, define a standard County Urban Growth Boundary as a one -quarter -
mile perimeter around the municipal limits that are currently physically served by central
sewer (whether by the municipality or other recognized agencies)."
The property is located within the urban growth boundary of the City of Greeley. Section 22-2-
40.E.1 of the Weld County Code states the following criteria shall be considered when
considering an application in an urban growth boundary area:
UD.Policy 5.1.The County may consider approving a land use development within an urban
growth boundary area if all of the following criteria are met:
The adjacent municipality does not consent to annex the land or property in a timely manner,
or annexation is not legally possible.
The proposed development, including public facility and service provision, is consistent with
other urban -type uses and conforms to County regulations.
The proposed urban development attempts to be compatible with the adjacent municipality's
comprehensive plan (though it may not necessarily conform to it).
The City of Greeley, in their referral dated February 29, 2008 and letter dated March 20, 2008, states that
it would be more appropriate for the applicant to annex and develop within the City of Greeley. However, in
its current state, any annexation would have to be petitioned by the property owner. The City of Greeley
also indicated that the proposed use would be required to locate in the Commercial High Intensity (C -H),
Industrial Low Intensity (I -L), or Industrial Medium Intensity (I -M) zone districts. The adjacent property to
4
•
•
the west was recently annexed into Greeley and is zoned Industrial Medium Intensity (I -M).
No letters of opposition or phone calls have been received from surrounding property owners.
Mr. Gathman pointed out a modification which needs to be made to the staff comments. In the original
Public Works referral it listed that C and F Streets are collector roads and require an 80 -foot right-of-way
at full build out. After talking with Don Dunker of Public Works C and F Streets are considered arterial
roads and require 140 -feet of right-of-way at full build out and which would have a future right-of-way
requirement of 70 feet from the centerline. Mr. Gathman indicated that in looking at the map he believes
that the house and outbuildings are still far enough back that they wouldn't be encroaching within that
area.
Jay Woods, 2040 Fairway Lane, Greeley, CO. Mr. Woods introduced his son Brad Woods. He
apologized for the continuation of this case.
Mr. Woods commented that he is not sure about the septic tank size. He stated that he is not excited
about being annexed into the City of Greeley as they started this process with County. He added that his
son lives out there and would like for him to continue living out there for security reasons.
Mr. Woods said that they can certainly find out exactly how big the septic system is to make sure they are
in compliance. He pointed out that the employees are seasonal and they come in the morning and then
back at the end of the day. He added that there are a couple of secretaries there.
Commissioner Holton asked if they have talked to an engineer about the septic system. Mr. Woods said
that he can have an engineer evaluate the septic system; however he just didn't want to go through a lot of
expense if he was going to be annexed. Mr. Woods commented that the cost to hook up to the sewer line
would be approximately $15,000.00.
Commissioner Berryman asked the applicant to give more background information on his discussions with
the City of Greeley about annexation and also hooking into the sewer system and why that didn't go
through and where it stands at this point. Mr. Woods said that originally they couldn't get hooked into the
line because they were told it was a high pressure line and now they've been told it is not. He added that
in all honesty he would like to stay with the county. He has paid for permits with the county and then if he
has to go through the city he would have additional costs for permits.
Commissioner Hall asked how many people live in the house. Mr. Woods stated that only his son lives in
the house.
Don Dunker, Public Works, said C and F Streets are arterial roads and require 140 -feet of right-of-way at
full build out. Presently there is 60 foot of right-of-way and it is maintained by Weld County. The traffic
counts taken in 2008 for C Street were 2281 ADT and the traffic counts for F Street in 2008 were 2310
ADT.
Mr. Dunker stated that 25th Avenue, which is north of this site, is a local paved road and requires a 60 foot
right-of-way at full build out. There is presently 60 foot of right-of-way and it is maintained by Weld
County. The traffic counts taken north of the bridge over the river were 2714 ADT. This application will
add approximately 50 vehicle trips for the 15 employees.
Mr. Dunker stated that the access is from F Street and it appears to be as far west of the property as
possible. There will only be one (1) access allowed for this property. 40 foot radiuses will be required at
the access.
A water quality capture feature shall be constructed for the buildings, drives and other impervious areas.
This USR is located in a FEMA 100 -year floodplain. As determined by the 2003 Core Study by the City of
Greeley, this property would have a base elevation of 4663 feet and a Flood Hazard Development Permit
will be required.
Mr. Dunker clarified that Condition of Approval 1.6.4 should be amended to read "C and F Streets are
5
•
•
•
arterial roads and require a 140 -foot right-of-way at full build out. There is presently a 60 -foot right-of-way.
70 feet from the centerlines of C and F streets shall be indicated as edge of future right-of-way. These
roads are maintained by Weld County. Pursuant to the definition of SETBACK in the Weld County Zoning
923-1-90), the required setback is measured from the future right-of-way line."
(Bruce Barker entered meeting at 2:03 p.m.)
Tom Holton moved to amend Condition of Approval 1.8.4 and change Development Standard #6 from 24
employees to 15 as recommended by staff, seconded by Erich Ehrlich. Motion carried unanimously.
The Chair asked for comments from Environmental Health.
Lauren Light, Environmental Health, stated that the water is supplied by City of Greeley. The septic
system is the issue with this case. Back in 2007, the applicant applied for a Statement of Existing through
the Health Department for the existing system. Based on the information submitted by the applicant their
septic tank is 500 gallons and today's standards are 1000 gallons. Therefore if the applicant wanted to
upsize it he would have to apply for a permit through the Health Department; however based on the
regulations they couldn't issue the permit because of the 400 foot rule with the City of Greeley. The
regulations do allow that if the City of Greeley states that it is not feasible for them to hook up to sewer and
provide a letter then a permit can be issued to the applicant.
Based on the information the applicant submitted in 2007 that system was sized for a two bedroom house
or for four people and the applicant is requesting 15 employees. Ms. Light indicated that maybe it would
be acceptable since the employees are not there all the time but right now a 500 gallon tank is not
sufficient. The regulations require that at a minimum a 1000 gallon tank is needed for commercial,
industrial, and residential zone districts.
Commissioner Hall asked where the exact location of the sewer line is, if it is truly within the 400 foot. Ms.
Light stated that she believed it was within 200 feet and commented that the City of Greeley could verify
that distance.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Brandon Gossard, City of Greeley Planning and Zoning Department. Mr. Gossard entered a letter into
record and thanked the Commissioners for the opportunity to provide comments. He added that although
it is adjacent to the city limits the City of Greeley does have an interest in the manner that it develops.
Mr. Gossard commented that the principle concern in the letter is the verification of the septic system.
Secondly, the conditions of approval provided indicate that a dust abatement plan, waste management
plan, and a screening plan will be provided and approved. He indicated that the City of Greeley would like
to be able to review those plans to ensure that the manner of development is at the very least compatible
if not compliant with city standards. Ultimately, the letter does recommend another continuation until the
septic system question is answered and until the city can review the waste handling plan, dust abatement
plan and the screening plan for compliance or compatibility with municipal standards.
Mr. Gossard mentioned that in the spring of 2008, Mr. Gathman organized a group meeting in which the
City had drafted an annexation agreement for the purposes of a starting a dialogue. Shortly thereafter,
Mr. Woods had some unfortunate medical conditions and the city did not pursue the matter. At this point it
is still at the first rendition of the offered annexation agreement.
Mr. Gossard referred to the question of where the exact location is of the sewer line and stated that the
sanitary sewer line is located in the railroad right-of-way. By measuring the distance from the structure
itself it is further away than 400 linear feet; however from the property line it is approximately 30 to 40 feet.
He added that the City of Greeley's Water and Sewer division took a look at the sanitary sewer line and
determined that it would be feasible for this property to connect to the city's sanitary sewer.
Commissioner Grand asked if the agreement defining the 400 feet is specifically designed to a property
line or to the actual physical location of the sewer system. Mr. Gossard said that he understands that it is
6
•
•
•
from the property line as that is what they have been operating under.
Commissioner Holton asked what the county code states with regard to the 400 foot designation. Ms.
Light said that it states that no individual sewage disposal system permit shall be issued to any person
when the subject dwelling, place of business, or institution is located within 400 feet from a sewer line of a
municipality or special district. Ms. Light added that they have always referred to the property line. Bruce
Barker, County Attorney agreed with Ms. Light and added that it was written from the state statute so they
track identically. He further added that our policy has always been from the property line.
Commissioner Holton commented that if is 30 feet from the property line but over 500 feet from the
connection to the structure, when does it become an undue burden. Mr. Barker commented that they
have always measured from the property line and believes that is the way the state interprets it too.
Commissioner Berryman asked if the applicant would be bearing the full cost of the installment. Mr.
Gossard stated that it would be a private tap so the applicant would bear the entire cost.
Mr. Gathman wished to clarify the distance from the structures and stated that according to GIS it is
approximately 600 feet from the nearest house to the sewer line.
Commissioner Holton asked Mr. Woods if he knew for sure what size the tank is. Mr. Woods said he did
not know but would have someone come to inspect it to determine how big it is.
Commissioner Ocshner asked how reasonable cost is determined. Mr. Gathman said that the feasibility is
determined by the municipality. Mr. Barker added that he is not certain if the feasibility was tied to an
individual but tied more to the municipality.
Commissioner Holton said that it does not seem right to have all that expense for one house. Mr. Barker
said that our interpretation has been from the property line but the regulation does say from the subject
dwelling, place of business or institution; therefore you need to make your own determination.
Commissioner Hall believes that the intent is for subdivisions and that makes a big difference because
there are multiple homes. He added that when it states "subject dwelling" it seems that it makes it clear
that it is where the house sits on the property. Mr. Barker said that you could look at it another way in that
a vacant lot is within 400 feet of the sewer line and someone says they want to put their house on the
other end of the lot. Therefore the property boundary has been an adequate way of interpreting that.
Jay Freeze, Freeze Engineering, 217 E 18`" St, Greeley entered the meeting and announced that he had
some information on Mr. Wood's septic system. He commented that the sewer line is at the south end of
the property and within 400 feet of the property line. The house is at the extreme north end of the
property. He added that this sewer line is a main trunk line and he believes that the City of Greeley would
not be particularly interested in having a single property tie into their main trunk line. He added that
hooking up to the city's sewer main is not a practical alternative for Mr. Woods.
Commissioner Ochsner asked Mr. Freeze if he knew the status of the septic system. Mr. Freeze replied
that they have not inspected the system. He indicated that Mr. Woods wished to wait until after this
hearing to determine that.
Commissioner Holton commented that we will be seeing more issues like this as there are farm houses
that are getting encroached upon by city limits. Mr. Barker commented that it is one of those things of
where staffs interpretation is based upon how the Board of County Commissioners and the Planning
Commission interpret our regulations. It is just that with this case you can see the benefit of going either
way. Maybe the way to distinguish this case from the typical situation is that there is an existing home.
Ms. Light commented that she just spoke to her director about this situation and in his opinion you could
go 400 feet from the structure. In this case it is a really old system and obviously public health would
prefer that they were on sanitary sewer. The house was built in 1957. We do not know how the system is
working or any information about the system so there will be some expense for the applicant in upgrading
the system.
7
•
•
•
Commissioner Holton wished to clarify that the interpretation from the Planning Commission has changed
from the property line to the structure on existing homes.
The Chair asked the applicant if he has read through the amended Development Standards and Conditions of
Approval and if they are in agreement with those. The applicant replied that he is in agreement.
Robert Grand moved that Case USR-1651 be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners along with the
amended Conditions of Approval and Development Standards with the Planning Commission's
recommendation of approval, seconded by Tom Holton.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Nick
Berryman, yes with comment; Erich Ehrlich, yes; Robert Grand, yes; Bill Hall, yes with comment; Mark Lawley,
absent; Roy Spitzer, absent; Tom Holton, yes; Doug Ochsner, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
Commissioner Berryman recommended that in the future we try to use this interpretation of the distance
sparingly and only in cases as necessary. He would hate to see a major precedent set with this.
Commissioner Hall felt that some clarity was brought to the problem that they will encounter in the future. He
added that this will help both the Environmental Health Department and themselves to look at this because a
sewer line in that length would be an undue burden on a single family residence.
The Chair called a recess at 2:48 pm and reconvened the meeting at 2:54 p.m.
The Chair read the following case into record.
CASE NUMBER: USR-1700
APPLICANT: Roy Wardell do Noble Energy
PLANNER: Jacqueline Hatch
REQUEST: A Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit for a Major
Facility of a Public Utility or Public Agencies (communication tower) in the A
(Agricultural) Zone District.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: W2 of Section 19, T3N, R65W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
LOCATION: South of and adjacent to CR 32 and 1/2 mile west of CR 39.
Jacqueline Hatch, Planning Services, reminded the Planning Commission that this case does not get
forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners; the Planning Commission has the final determination.
The sign announcing the Planning Commission hearing was posted on June 24, 2009 by staff.
The site is located south of and adjacent to County Road 32 and approximately'/ mile west of County Road
39 consisting of approximately 318 +/- acres; however the USR boundary is proposed to be only 900 square
feet.
The communications tower shall not exceed 180 feet in height.
The facility is located in a remote area. There are seven property owners within 500 feet of the subject
property. No comments were received from any surrounding property owners. The facility is unmanned and
will not create additional use in the area. The surrounding property is primarily agricultural. The property to
the northwest consists of a Compressor Station (AMUSR-1067), an Oil and Gas Support Facility (2 AMUSR-
1280) and an Injection Well site (USR-1677). The property directly to the east is a Turkey Farm (SUP -243)
which is not in operation at this time.
The site is not located within the three mile referral areas for any municipality or County.
The site is proposed to be unmanned. Therefore no permanent water or sewer is required. Portable toilets
and hand washing units are to be utilized during construction of the tower. Bottled water shall be used during
construction for drinking.
8
5/5/c?
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
•
•
•
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
A regular meeting of the Weld County Planning Commission was held in the Weld County Department of
Planning Services, Hearing Room, 918 10th Street, Greeley, Colorado. The meeting was called to order by
Chair, Doug Ochsner, at 1:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL ABSENT
Doug Ochsner - Chair
Tom Holton - Vice Chair
Nick Berryman
Paul Branham
Erich Ehrlich
Robert Grand
Bill Hall
Mark Lawley
Roy Spitzer
ei
C
C
N
(-
Also Present: Chris Gathman, Jacqueline Hatch, and Kim Ogle, Department of Planning Services; Don
Carroll, Department of Public Works; Lauren Light, Department of Health; Cyndy Giauque, County Attorney,
and Kris Ranslem, Secretary.
Robert Grand moved to approve the April 7, 2009 Weld County Planning Commission minutes, seconded by
Erich Ehrlich. Motion carried.
The Chair read the first case into record.
CASE NUMBER:
APPLICANT:
PLANNER:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
REQUEST:
LOCATION:
USR-1651
Jay & Sherrie Woods
Chris Gathman
Part of the SW4SE4 of Section 36, T6N, R66W of the 6th P.M., Weld
County, Colorado.
A Site Specific Development Plan and Special Use Permit for any use
permitted as a Use by Right, an ACCESSORY USE, or a Use by Special
Review in the COMMERCIAL or Industrial Zone Districts, (Lawn Tree and
Care Business) provided that the property is not a Lot in an approved or
recorded subdivision plat or lots parts of a map or plan filed prior to adoption
of any regulations controlling subdivision and One (1) SINGLE-FAMILY
DWELLING UNIT per LOT other than those permitted under Section 23-3-
20.A (addition of future single-family home) in the A (Agricultural) Zone
District.
South of and adjacent to "F" Street and 1/8 mile west of "C" Street.
Chris Gathman, Planning Services, stated that the applicant indicated to him that they are looking to
potentially downscale their business. He added that staff did not receive a formal request for a hearing
date to continue this to; however this case is a violation case. Mr. Gathman commented that the applicant
does have some substantial health issues that he is dealing with. He added that the applicant's son is
also involved with the business therefore he will try to talk to the son directly on this matter.
Mr. Gathman recommended continuing this case 60 days to the July 7, 2009 Planning Commission
meeting. This should give the applicant time to come up with a plan if they wish to modify their application
or proceed as it has been submitted.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. No
one wished to speak.
Robert Grand moved to continue USR-1651 to the July 7, 2009 Planning Commission meeting, seconded
by Roy Spitzer. Motion carried.
•
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
•
•
Tuesday, November 4, 2008
A regular meeting of the Weld County Planning Commission was held in the Weld County Department of
Planning Services, Hearing Room, 918 10th Street, Greeley, Colorado. The meeting was called to order by
Chair, Tom Holton, at 1:34 p.m.
ROLL CALL
Tom Holton
Nick Berryman
Robert Grand
Bill Hall
Mark Lain/ley
Roy Spitzer
ABSENT
Doug Ochsner
Paul Branham
Erich Ehrlich
C
f,..V.
C'
CCO
Cr
b
O
w
Also Present: Chris Gathman, Kim Ogle, Brad Mueller, Department of Planning Services; Dave Snyder, Don
Dunker, Department of Public Works; Lauren Light, Troy Swain, Department of Health; Cyndy Giauque,
County Attorney, and Kris Ranslem, Secretary.
Robert Grand moved to approve the October 21, 2008 Weld County Planning Commission minutes, seconded
by Bill Hall. Motion carried.
— CASE NUMBER:
APPLICANT:
PLANNER:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
REQUEST:
LOCATION:
USR-1651
Jay & Sherrie Woods
Chris Gathman
Part of the SW4SE4 of Section 36, T6N, R66W of the 6th P.M., Weld County,
Colorado.
A Site Specific Development Plan and Special Use Permit for any use permitted as
a Use by Right, an ACCESSORY USE, or a Use by Special Review in the
COMMERCIAL or Industrial Zone Districts, (Lawn Tree and Care Business)
provided that the property is not a Lot in an approved or recorded subdivision plat or
lots parts of a map or plan filed prior to adoption of any regulations controlling
subdivision and One (1) SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNIT per LOT other than
those permitted under Section 23-3-20.A (addition of future single-family home) in
the A (Agricultural) Zone District.
South of and adjacent to "F" Street and 1/8 mile west of "C" Street.
Chris Gathman, Planning Services, commented that staff is requesting that this case be continued out six (6)
months to the May 5, 2009 Planning Commission hearing. The applicant is having some health concerns at
this time. He added that staff cannot recommend an indefinite continuance as it is a land use violation so it
still needs to be kept open.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. No
one wished to speak.
Robert Grand moved to continue case USR-1651 to the May 5, 2009 Planning Commission meeting,
seconded by Roy Spitzer.
The Chair read the first item on the Consent Agenda.
CASE NUMBER:
APPLICANT:
PLANNER:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
REQUEST:
USR-1671
Weld County
Chris Gathman
Part NE4 of Section 33, T6N, R66W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
A Site Specific Development Plan and a Special Review Permit for Open Pit
Mining and Materials Processing (dry mining), subject to the provisions of Article
IV, Division 4 of this Chapter in the A (Agricultural) Zone District.
eI-a-2ex1V
•
•
•
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Tuesday, September 2, 2008
A regular meeting of the Weld County Planning Commission was held in the Weld County Department of
Planning Services, Hearing Room, 918 10th Street, Greeley, Colorado. The meeting was called to order by
Chair, Doug Ochsner, at 1:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL ABSENT
Doug Ochsner - Chair
Tom Holton - Vice Chair
Nick Berryman
Paul Branham
Erich Ehrlich
Robert Grand
Bill Hall
Mark Lawley
Roy Spitzer
Also Present: Chris Gathman, Department of Planning Services; Don Dunker, Department of Public Works;
Troy Swain, Department of Health; Bruce Barker, County Attorney, and Kris Ranslem, Secretary.
Doug Ochsner commented that he would like to amend the August 19, 2008 minutes. He indicated that after
the first case on the Consent Agenda (AmUSR-1356), he asked if there was anyone in the audience who
wished to speak for or against this application and there was someone who did wish to speak. Therefore he
would like to strike that sentence on page 1 of the minutes.
Robert Grand moved to approve the amended August 19, 2008 Weld County Planning Commission minutes,
seconded by Tom Holton. Motion carried.
CASE NUMBER:
APPLICANT:
PLANNER:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
REQUEST:
LOCATION:
USR-1651
Jay & Sherrie Woods
Chris Gathman
Part of the SW4SE4 of Section 36, T6N, R66W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
A Site Specific Development Plan and Special Use Permit for any use permitted as a
Use by Right, an ACCESSORY USE, ora Use by Special Review in the COMMERCIAL
or Industrial Zone Districts, (Lawn Tree and Care Business) provided that the property is
not a Lot in an approved or recorded subdivision plat or lots parts of a map or plan filed
prior to adoption of any regulations controlling subdivision and One (1) SINGLE-FAMILY
DWELLING UNIT per LOT other than those permitted under Section 23-3-20.A (addition
of future single-family home) in the A (Agricultural) Zone District.
South of and adjacent to "F" Street and 1/8 mile west of "C" Street.
The Chair asked Mr. Gathman if staff wishes to continue this item. Chris Gathman, Department of Planning
Services, replied that staff does wish for this case to be continued. He indicated that the applicant is currently
in the hospital and added that staff is still dealing with regulations from the City of Greeley in regard to their
sewer service. Mr. Gathman commented that they have had phone conversations with the City of Greeley as
to whether or not they would require the applicant to tie into sewer. It is unclear if the City of Greeley would
require annexing them immediately or have an annexation agreement. Mr. Gathman stated that until we can
get resolution on that issue we have conditions of approval that the applicant technically could not meet.
Therefore, until staff hears back from the City of Greeley we would recommend that this case be continued out
to the November 4, 2008 hearing. Mr. Gathman indicated that he is confident that he should be hearing
something back from the City of Greeley within the next week.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against continuing this case
to the November 4, 2008 Planning Commission meeting. No one wished to speak.
Roy Spitzer moved to continue Case USR-1651 to the November 4, 2008 Planning Commission hearing,
seconded by Nick Berryman. Motion carried unanimously.
,260.
SUMMARY OF THE WELD COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
•
•
•
Tuesday, June 3, 2008
A regular meeting of the Weld County Planning Commission was held in the Weld County Department of
Planning Services, Hearing Room, 918 10th Street, Greeley, Colorado. The meeting was called to order by
Vice -Chair, Tom Holton, at 1:30 p.m.
ROLL CALL ABSENT
Doug Ochsner
Tom Holton
Nick Berryman
Paul Branham
Robert Grand
Mark Lawley
Erich Ehrlich
Bill Hall
Roy Spitzer
CIO
Co
C
c
0
rn-q
73
u)�
Also Present: Chris Gathman, Kim Ogle, Department of Planning Services; Don Dunker, Department of Public
Works; Lauren Light, Department of Health; Bruce Barker, County Attorney, and Kris Ranslem, Secretary.
Robert Grand moved to approve the May 20, 2008 Weld County Planning Commission minutes, seconded by
Nick Berryman. Motion carried.
CASE NUMBER:
APPLICANT:
PLANNER:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
REQUEST:
LOCATION:
USR-1649
Hall -Irwin Corporation
Chris Gathman
SW4 NE4 and W2 SE4 of Section 25, T6N, R67W of the 6th P.M., Weld County,
Colorado.
A Site Specific Development Plan and a Special Review Permit for Mineral
Resource Development Facility including Open Pit Gravel Mining (Dry Pit mining)
and materials processing, a Concrete Batch Plant, an Asphalt Batch Plant, an
Asphalt/Concrete Recycling Plant, Materials Blending, and Import of Materials in the
A (Agricultural) Zone District.
South of and adjacent to CR 64.75 and west of and adjacent to CR 23.75.
Chris Gathman, Department of Planning Services, commented that Hall Irwin is respectively requesting to
withdraw their application for USR-1649.
Mark Lawley moved that Case USR-1649 be withdrawn, seconded by Paul Branham. Motion carried
unanimously.
— CASE NUMBER:
APPLICANT:
PLANNER:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
REQUEST:
LOCATION:
USR-1651
Jay & Sherrie Woods
Chris Gathman
Part of the SW4SE4 of Section 36, T6N, R66W of the 6th P.M., Weld County,
Colorado.
A Site Specific Development Plan and Special Use Permit for any use permitted as
a Use by Right, an ACCESSORY USE, or a Use by Special Review in the
COMMERCIAL or Industrial Zone Districts, (Lawn Tree and Care Business)
provided that the property is not a Lot in an approved or recorded subdivision plat or
lots parts of a map or plan filed prior to adoption of any regulations controlling
subdivision and One (1) SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNIT per LOT other than
those permitted under Section 23-3-20.A (addition of future single-family home) in
the A (Agricultural) Zone District.
South of and adjacent to "F" Street and 1/8 mile west of "C" Street.
Chris Gathman, Department of Planning Services, stated that the applicant is requesting to continue this case
for ninety (90) days. The applicant is exploring issues of obtaining sewer service which may require
annexation into the City of Greeley. Mr. Gathman suggested continuing the case until September 2, 2008 or
dentritud.
October 7, 2008.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. No
one wished to speak.
Robert Grand moved that Case USR-1651 be continued to the September 2, 2008 Planning Commission
hearing, seconded by Nick Berryman. Motion carried unanimously.
CASE NUMBER:
APPLICANT:
PLANNER:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
REQUEST:
LOCATION:
USR-1654
Western Sugar Cooperative do Mike Otto
Kim Ogle
E2NE4 Section 28, T6N, R65W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
A Site Specific Development Plan and Special Review Permit for an Agricultural
Service establishment primarily engaged in performing agricultural, animal
husbandry or horticultural services on a fee or contract basis, including Sorting,
Grading and Packing fruits and vegetables for the grower (handling and storage
of sugar beets) in the Agricultural Zone District.
West of and adjacent to CR 43; South of and adjacent to CR 66.
Kim Ogle, Department of Planning Services, stated that Mike Otto is the representative for Western Sugar
Cooperative. They are seeking approval of the current application for a Site Specific Development Plan and
Special Review Permit for a beet piling and storage operation.
The current facility is located in the east part of Greeley, and due to economic considerations sugar beets are
no longer processed at this location and therefore the property has been marketed for re -development. It is
the desire of the Cooperative to locate the beet piling and storage operations outside of the City of Greeley to
this proposed location.
The site is located west of and adjacent to County Road 43; South of and adjacent to County Road 66.
The site is located in the influence area of the Greeley -Weld County Airport, and also within the
Comprehensive Planning Area for the City of Greeley. The City of Greeley, in their referral comment
received May 22, 2008, indicated no objections to this application.
The uses which will be permitted will be compatible with the existing surrounding land uses. Lands adjacent to
this development are predominately agricultural. Five single family residences are in the near vicinity, one is
on the property and not associated with this facility. Four single family residences are to the north/northwest of
the proposed facility, north of County Road 66. DCP Midstream operates the Lucerne gas processing facility
to the south of this property (2n° AmUSR-552). A letter dated February 14, 2008 from DCP indicates no
objections to this proposal. Southeast of this proposal is a confined animal feeding operation (SUP -172).
Adjacent roads are paved with adjacent borrow ditches. At stated in the application materials, there are ten
property owners within 500 feet of this application.
The site consists of irrigated agricultural land historically planted in crops. This year the western half of
the property is planted in wheat and the eastern half planted in row crop. There are no improvements on
the site, however, there are numerous oil and gas encumbrances managed by Noble Energy. The
applicant has placed the beet pilers on the land; however the equipment has not been positioned or set
up. Property has two points of ingress and egress recently cut into the property, the one to the west
aligns itself with a farm access across the road. The single family residence and driveway are to the west
of this alignment. The easternmost access for the piler aligns itself with open fields in production. Oil and
gas access roads are to the east and west of each drive respectively. Overhead electric is to the south of
County Road 66 on wood poles. Underground electric and Atmos gas are located to the North of County
Road 66. DCP Midstream has a gas line south of County Road 66. Adjacent to the borrow ditch is a
concrete lined ditch for irrigation water. Oil and gas encumbrances are present on site; i.e., two pumper
jacks and 3 -tank battery's are present on site [Noble Energy (Swanson 4-28)], more so to the east of the
proposed facility.
The applicant, Western Sugar Cooperative, has indicated that the initial set up is for the beet pilers and
storage of crop, with future development to include a shop/office structure for piler equipment
maintenance and offices for support staff (Agriculturists, Accountants, and Engineers). On -site
2
4 -I -L2
•
•
•
Chris Gathman, Department of Planning Services, stated that the applicant is requesting that this case be
continued to May 6, 2008 to address some pending issues with their application. He added that planning staff
is supportive of their request.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
Tom Livingston, 11822 CR 64. Mr. Livingston stated that he lives adjacent to the subject property and has no
opposition to the continuance. However, he commented that he would like to be provided with notification of
that prior to the meeting so that they can make arrangements to attend the hearing.
Mr. Gathman commented that the reason for part of the continuance is that the applicant was going to be
working with the surrounding property owners. He added that he will make sure that Mr. Livingston will be
notified of when the meeting will be.
Paul Branham moved to continue Case USR-1649 to May 6, 2008, seconded by Mark Lawley. Motion carried
unanimously.
The Chair announced that there have been some changes to the agenda; therefore they would start with Case
USR-1063.
CASE NUMBER:
APPLICANT:
PLANNER:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
REQUEST:
LOCATION:
USR-1063
Public Service Company of Colorado
Hannah Hippely
Parts of Section 3 and Section 10 of T3N, R67W of the 6th P.
Colorado.
Vacation of a portion of USR-1063
North of and adjacent to CR 34, and adjacent to the east and
M., Weld County,
west of CR 19.5.
Hannah Hippely, Department of Planning Services, stated that as required by the Conditions of Approval
for USR-1647, Public Service Company of Colorado was required to vacate the existing Use by Special
Review permits already on that property.
Ms. Hippely commented that USR-1063 was approved by the Planning Commission in 1995 as a Major
Facility of a Public Utility. Since the Planning Commission was the decision making body on that case, the
Planning Commission is also the decision making body in the vacation of that Use by Special Review.
The permit was for the repowering of the St. Vrain facility and approximately 22 miles of natural gas
pipeline. This request is to vacate the portion of the Use by Special Review permit that covers the power
plant and then to retain the portion of the permit that covers the gas pipeline. Ms. Hippely stated that staff
is supportive of the vacation as this will clarify the permit's related to the facility and will also prevent
multiple USRs from being layered on the same site.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. No
one wished to speak.
Commissioner Spitzer asked what the effects of vacating this case are. Ms. Hippely clarified that vacating this
would be to make sure that we don't have duplication on the same site.
Tom Holton moved to approve the partial vacation of USR-1063, seconded by Mark Lawley.
The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Nick
Berryman, yes; Paul Branham, yes; Erich Ehrlich, absent; Robert Grand, yes; Bill Hall, absent; Mark Lawley,
yes; Roy Spitzer, yes; Tom Holton, yes; Doug Ochsner, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
The Chair moved onto Case USR-1651.
CASE NUMBER:
APPLICANT:
PLANNER:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
USR-1651
Jay & Sherrie Woods
Chris Gathman
Part of the SW4SE4 of Section 36, T6N, R66W of the 6th P.M., Weld County,
•
•
REQUEST:
LOCATION:
Colorado.
A Site Specific Development Plan and Special Use Permit for any use permitted as
a Use by Right, an ACCESSORY USE, or a Use by Special Review in the
COMMERCIAL or Industrial Zone Districts, (Lawn Tree and Care Business)
provided that the property is not a Lot in an approved or recorded subdivision plat or
lots parts of a map or plan filed prior to adoption of any regulations controlling
subdivision and One (1) SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNIT per LOT other than
those permitted under Section 23-3-20.A (addition of future single-family home) in
the A (Agricultural) Zone District.
South of and adjacent to "F" Street and 1/8 mile west of "C" Street.
Chris Gathman, Department of Planning Services, stated that the applicant, Jay Woods, has just
requested to continue this hearing until June 3, 2008 due to several outstanding issues. He added that
they still need to evaluate whether to annex to Greeley or to revise their application.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application.
No one wished to speak.
Tom Holton moved to continue Case USR-1651 to June 3, 2008, seconded by Paul Branham. Motion
carried unanimously.
CASE NUMBER:
APPLICANT:
PLANNER:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
REQUEST:
LOCATION:
USR-1633
Spicer Ranches, LTD
Kim Ogle
SW4 of Section 27, T7N, R65W of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
A Site Specific Development Plan and Special Use Permit for Roping Arenas, to
include both indoor and outdoor arenas, commercial, in the (A) Agricultural Zone
District.
North of and adjacent to CR 76 and East of and adjacent to CR 43.
Kim Ogle, Department of Planning Services, stated that applicant is requesting a one month continuance
of this case so that they can address conditions in a referral from the Department of Building Inspection.
He added that staff is supportive of this request.
The Chair asked if the applicant had anything they would like to add.
Linda Hulse, Casseday Creative Designs, commented that they have become aware of some conditions
that they thought were taken care of and were not. She added that they would like the chance to talk to
the Building Department to resolve these issues. Ms. Hulse stated that they are requesting a continuance
to the May 6, 2008 meeting.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application. No
one wished to speak.
Robert Grand moved to continue Case USR-1633 to May 6, 2008, seconded by Roy Spitzer. Motion carried
unanimously.
Meeting adjourned at 1:47 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Kristine Ranslem
Secretary
Hello